From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Manyam v. Sobol

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
May 14, 1992
183 A.D.2d 1022 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

May 14, 1992


After being convicted of conspiracy in the fourth degree and attempted grand larceny in the second degree based upon her participation in a scheme to defraud the State Medicaid program, petitioner was charged with professional misconduct in violation of Education Law § 6509 (5) (a) (i). The Regents Review Committee, to which the matter had been directly referred for the purpose of conducting a hearing on the issue of petitioner's penalty, recommended that petitioner's license to practice medicine be revoked. Respondent Commissioner of Education ultimately issued an order in conformity with that recommendation. Petitioner's sole contention is that the penalty imposed is unusually severe because her misconduct was economic in nature and had no impact on patient care. We disagree. In view of the fraudulent and deceitful nature of petitioner's conduct and the harm done to the Medicaid system (see, Matter of Beldengreen v. Sobol, 175 A.D.2d 423, 424; Matter of Diamond v Sobol, 145 A.D.2d 786, 788), we find the penalty of revocation neither "shocking to one's sense of fairness" nor "disproportionate to the misconduct" (Matter of Pell v. Board of Educ., 34 N.Y.2d 222, 234).

Mikoll, J.P., Yesawich Jr., Levine, Mercure and Crew III, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.


Summaries of

Matter of Manyam v. Sobol

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
May 14, 1992
183 A.D.2d 1022 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

Matter of Manyam v. Sobol

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of AMMAJI MANYAM, Petitioner, v. THOMAS SOBOL, as…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: May 14, 1992

Citations

183 A.D.2d 1022 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
583 N.Y.S.2d 613

Citing Cases

People v. Evans

But such evidence was merely further evidence of a crime for which she was charged: conspiracy to commit…

Matter of Surpris v. State of New York

Moreover, because the Hearing Officer permitted petitioner to testify concerning the general nature of his…